Acceleration Considerations. It's nice having
constructive discussion. I added this to a comment about a test-drive
post with Prime: 16 years ago, when I got my first Prius, there were many antagonists hoping
to undermine hybrids success by emphasizing the slower acceleration. They
had an extremely difficult time proving the 12.5 seconds for 0-60 was
dangerous, as they had relentlessly claimed. The maximum-power from a
dead-stop scenario was too rare and the acceleration was adequate.
Being "adequate" is obviously a hard sell though. But when the next
generation came out and was discovered to be faster, all those troublemakers
vanished. If you carefully observe ordinary highway merging, you'll
notice it takes quite a bit more than 10 seconds anyway. The flow of
traffic simply isn't moving that fast. Dropping the pedal to the floor
isn't necessary. EV AUTO mode provides that "if I need it"
confidence. The default EV mode provides what some have been begging for
years for, an option that keeps the engine off under all circumstances. The
choice is yours. I'll be sharing my firsthand experiences with Prime
soon enough. Hopefully, I'll find out on Wednesday where my order is in
early December inventory.

11-27-2016

New Hate. You gotta love posts that end with:
"You are just an ignorant ignorant Toyota fan boy." The
ironic nature of nature of that comment compels me to reply again.
Since the intent of the design variation of Prime with Prius is a clear
effort to attract different Toyota buyers, of course anything said in favor
of it would be considered a "fan boy" comment. What else could it be?
The goal is to achieve market growth. How would that be possible
without offering another choice? Talking about ignorant of how the
economics of business works. To draw interest from those shopping the
showroom, that diversity is essential. As for the decision to go with
comfortable seating for 2 in back, rather than squeezing in 3 and trading
off extra storage, look no further than GM. After about the first 2 years
of Volt availability, arguments in favor of offering that middle position
faded away. And when gen-2 finally rolled out, it still didn't. There is
nothing but a legless hump with a seatbelt. Quite a number of luxury
vehicles don't bother with the seat in the middle either. If you have a
larger family, you're not going to be driving a midsize car anyway. That's
what the full-size vehicles are for. Too bad if you don't like a shift
away from the status quo. Toyota's effort to try something else should be
congratulated. Just think if buckets in back catch on. Someday, they could
offer them as heated seats. After all, heated seats in front are now
standard.

11-27-2016

Toyota's Approach. There was a new article posted on
a green-vehicle website which attracts a wide variety of posters.
Almost immediately, an antagonist post appeared. It was the first
comment too. By the time I posted a reply though, it had already been
removed. I wasn't sure why either. It wasn't that bad.
Anywho, my reply was lost upon refreshing later. So, it only appeared
briefly. Fortunately, I saved it here. The comment was about how
Toyota is finally coming around to EV offerings, despite having supposedly
be so opposed to it in the past. I posted:

The
perception of "trash talk" was never understood. People
believe and repeat what they want. So, looking back at history
distorts the current reality. I remember a presentation back in 2007,
where Toyota clearly sighted the reason for not offering a plug-in was cost.
The reaction online was spin about lithium batteries being unsafe... despite
that never having been stated.

The other 2 deterrents of
plug-in offerings were a big deal too. The one was obvious: size &
weight. To offer something even remotely competitive with traditional
vehicles in terms of distance, you had no choice but to keep the vehicle
small. Heck, even Tesla confirmed that with their first offering.
The second was often overlooked: recharge speed. Look no further than
Volt for perspective. Full recharge time using level-1 takes around 13
hours. Getting people to add a 240-volt connection in their garage
presents a very large challenge for high-volume sales.

Think about
how Prius Prime paves the way. It's a full electric platform, complete with
a vapor-injected heat-pump and CHAdeMO recharging. Everything is in
place for accommodating larger battery-packs. In fact, a capacity
increase mid-cycle appears quite realistic. It's an affordable
platform with a great deal of potential. Heck, even a plug-in hybrid
version of RAV4 looks realistic.

In other words, there is no
back-pedaling. The approach was well thought out, but really frustrated
some who felt a different path should have been taken to get to the same
point.

11-26-2016

Enough Horsepower? It's great getting doubt in the
form of wanting to find out more, rather than drawing an conclusion with
little to no data. Those absolutes of the past were extremely
difficult to address. They wanted no part of a discussion. It
was a complete disregard for objectivity. Today, one of those nice
posts was: "I appreciate Toyota's desire to keep the car in EV mode as much as
possible, but I just don't think the car has enough HP to do that well."
I was happy to reply to that: Prius PHV already delivers enough for ordinary highway merging. I've
surprised myself an number of times noticing that the engine never fired up. The increase in EV power for Prime will make that even less of a need. n
other words, I think people will be pleasantly surprised that in EV AUTO it
will stay electric-only on most drives.

11-26-2016

Like Volt. What can you say when parallels are drawn
that are just plain wrong? The perception that Prime is supposedly
competing directly with Volt is to be expected. It's as weak as when
Prius was compared to Insight though. 15 years ago, that's all there
was. So, that's all people knew. Now, people really only know
Volt. That means the same type of misunderstood assumptions of purpose
will occur. I suspect many parallels to that situation long ago will
surface over the next few months. Remember all that "not the same"
nonsense? We'll see. In the meantime, this is how I put the
situation of who, why, and expected reach:
They are not the target market for Prime. Target is striving to grow the
market, to reach beyond niche buyers. Achieving sales from mainstream
customers is far more difficult than appealing to early adopters.
Also, there's the reality that a large quantity of small battery-packs will
have more of a environmental benefit than a small number of large
battery-packs. It's no different than the way renewable combustion
fuel is consumed. E10 usage in every regular gas vehicle has had a profound
impact compared to the tiny amount of flex vehicles actually using E85.

11-26-2016

Red Herrings. They distract from true purpose.
Some are intentional Some are oversights. All pose barriers.
I added this to the on-going debate: Toyota recognizes the "almost never" crowd and has taken a risk... the very
thing antagonists claim they don't do. So, they are offering more
comfortable seating in back rather than squeezing in a narrow middle spot
for brief use. Think about how many times you've had 5 people
squeezed into a midsize car with "seating for 5" in it. Toyota is being
practical by altering the paradigm. You want more seating in the future,
you'll end up buying a larger vehicle. It's like chasing the
acceleration red-herring. Why waste resources on something that would
rarely ever be used and isn't actually necessary?

11-25-2016

Objective Thinking. Phew! It's nice to get some
of this now: "Toyota has done that at the cost of a lower electric range. For people
who drive less than the US average daily distance the PHEV Prius will be a
good choice." Hopefully, my additions to that will be readily
accepted: For people who drive more it will be a good
choice too. 72 MPG is my lifetime average after 85,000 miles driving
in a 2012 Prius PHV, charged twice on most days. Double the 4.4 kWh
battery-pack is the 8.8 kWh now offered. So, even without a recharge
opportunity as I have at work, they'll get that efficiency with a Prime.
My driving is in Minnesota, so that real-world data includes some
pretty harsh conditions. I've taken a number of road-trips too, without the
opportunity to recharge. In other words, Prime will be able to reach
into the mainstream with a price that's actually able to compete directly
with the true competition... traditional vehicles. Think about how
much of a challenge it is to entice shoppers on the showroom floor.

11-25-2016

Missing The Point. It happens far too frequently.
People get hung up on things that make little or no difference. It's a
common problem online. Keeping the attention of some is nearly
impossible sometimes, especially if you want to share detail. Some
simply don't care. They say their piece have no interest in anything
else. That's the nature of encounters in comment sections of articles
for many. That makes any type of effort to be constructive a major
challenge. It's still worth trying though. For every
troublemaker, there are likely countless scores of lurkers. In today's
case, I kept the reply concise and without measure, to make sure the bigger
objective would stand out. Hopefully, it did:
Toyota has delivered a more efficient system with a lower production cost.
That's what will fulfill the goal of high-volume profitable sales
without dependency on tax-credits. Those who disregard that,
insisting that greater performance or range is needed, are missing the
point.

11-25-2016

Bolt Rollout. Being limited to just California &
Oregon until sometime in the Spring is bringing back bad memories from last
year. Not only is Bolt late, it isn't nationwide. Sound
familiar? Whatever the impression, it grows worse when getting news of
Prime rollout. Claims of it only being a compliance vehicle are
quickly falling apart, simply by stating what states new owners are
reporting purchases from. So far, I have read about experiences shared
(many with photos) from owners in California, New York, Colorado, New Jersey,
Arizona, Iowa, Missouri, Maryland, Washington (state), and Illinois. I
know that irritates Volt enthusiasts to no end. With gen-1 having
struggled, then gen-2 suffering in a similar fashion, and now Bolt, what is
there to say? I know if I post anything, it will be perceived as an
attack. So, pointing out articles which highlight the economy nature
of Bolt's interior, rather than focusing entirely on range & power, will
infruriate. Needless to say, I should just keep quiet. That
long-await shared purpose of promoting green affordable choices will happen,
eventually. I only need be patient. Sales challenges with this
rollout will help us find that common cause.

11-25-2016

No Truths. This certainly got my attention: "While
the Toyota Prius Prime comes out ahead with a price tag that is cheaper, it
offers the same output as the Chevrolet Volt and is more efficient in
regards to MPGe and mileage, it seems that the Volt is the more popular
vehicle. So let's take a look at the specs and find out why the Volt
comes out ahead despite the figures suggesting otherwise." That
was the opening paragraph to an article with this title: "Figures Tell
No Truths". I was quite intrigued to see what it had to say... so
much so, I wrote this lead up prior reading. That way, you get a clear
representation of my initial impression. Now, I will read it.

Sadly, the article literally said nothing. It only posted numbers
without anything to put them in context. That's seems like a good
approach, giving you the information you need without any bias.
Unfortunately, that's exactly how greenwashing works. A value provided
without an explanation of what it represents is misleading. In other
words, it contributes to assumptions. Making people assume is how the
deception works.

Anywho, I looked to the closely statement to figure
out what the writer's intent was: "Despite the numbers being in the
favour of the Toyota Prius Prime 56% of people chose to go with the
Chevrolet Volt." That made it obvious. No source for that
percentage was provided. Where did that number come from? Was it
a survey? How many participated? When was it conducted?

All I can know for certain is that 56% most
definitely wasn't based upon sales... the only quantity that truly matters.
Prime isn't available on dealer's lots yet. Heck, even those of us
attempting to place early orders are still waiting for delivery. There
is simply no constructive way to draw such a conclusion. A consumers
can say anything they want when no money is involved. Stating your
opinion with your wallet is an entirely different matter. That
opportunity is still not available

11-25-2016

Crossover Point, part 2. Needless to say, he got
annoyed by my response: "28 miles means 8.7 kWh? I don't know where you get this math from. Either
you are completely making it up or you have NO idea how much the battery
Volt uses to get 53 miles from." That made me wonder more than
ever where he got that 149-mile distance from. Not sharing any detail
whatsoever, no other numbers of any sort, provides nothing to work with.
So, I attempted to provide them all with my reply: Prime delivers 25 miles of EV.
Volt delivers 53 miles of EV. The difference is 28 miles. You can't
just omit that electricity consumed for those 28 miles from the efficiency
equation. That must be accounted for. 31 kWh/100 mi is the rating for
Volt. It means 0.31 kWh is consumed per mile of EV travel. Multiplying
that by 28 gives you a consumption value of 8.7 kWh. In other words, the
gas quantity for the 149 miles is the same but the electricity clearly is
not. Volt will consume an extra 8.7 kWh of it to reach that same
destination. It simply isn't as efficient of a plug-in vehicle, as the EPA
ratings tell us. Put yet another way, it will cost you roughly $1 more to
travel the 149 miles in a Volt than in a Prime. That's at a rate of 12 cents
per kWh of electricity.

11-25-2016

Crossover Point, part 1. A favorite argument detail
when comparing Volt to Prius PHV has always been the crossover point.
That's the point at which gas-consumption is equal for the 2 vehicles to
travel the same difference. Naturally, the greenwashing technique used
was to completely disregard electricity use. Sadly, there are many who
simply don't care about switching from one fuel to another without making an
effort to consume less. They see electricity as clean & abundant and
don't give it a second thought. That's a difficult attitude to
overcome. They come off as incredibly smug too, dismissing your
efforts to reduce consumption as anti-EV. It's a very real problem.
Gas is bad, period. So, the effort to overcome their resistance to be
constructive is an on-going challenge. This caught my attention: "That 149 miles only works if you disregard total efficiency
and focus only on gas consumption... which is an absolutely terrible way to
promote green choices." They never provide any detail. It's
always nothing but a distance. That makes the effort even more
difficult. Nonetheless, I tried: Those extra 28 miles of EV from Volt must be
accounted for. That's extra consumption of 8.7 kWh of electricity more than
Prime would use. That difference cannot just be ignored. We don't
want to promote carefree consumption of electricity... especially if the
source is dirty and/or not renewable.

11-25-2016

To Actually Compete. There's quite a bit of
disconnect at play now. Many posting about plug-in offerings aren't
taking the big picture into consideration. They only look at what's
being compared. For the past few days, it has been comments about an
article comparing Volt to Prime. That isolated perspective contributes
heavily to posting battles... which is exactly what those publications seek.
They want topics that stir participation. Today, I responded to such a
comment in a long series of posts with:

Calling Prius PHV anything like "pathetic" shows a disconnect for what
the market was actually like back then. It's like comparing a cell-phone of
the time to what's available now. Consumer wants were very different and
the technology has advanced quite a bit.

Large numbers of people were
insisting upon an augmented Prius being delivered. That meant increasing
the battery-pack size and adding a plug... which is exactly what Toyota
provided in 2010 with their prototype rollouts.

I had the opportunity
to drive one for a few days back then. It worked as hoped, the system
substantially boosted MPG. Plug-Provided electricity enhanced abilities.
The goal of achieving much increased efficiency without requiring a massive
cost sacrifice was fulfilled.

There was no requirement to deliver an
all EV driving experience. That expectation came years afterward, when it
was clear that Volt sales growth beyond niche buyers was in serious
jeopardy.

Think about what plugging in was like back then. Think
about how few consumers there are that are even interested in purchasing a
plug-in vehicle now. With gas at just $2 per gallon and the popularity of
small SUVs, the priority of Toyota to keep cost down is a really big deal.

Watch what happens to the plug-in market when tax-credits begin to
expire. The pressure to have a MSRP low enough to entice traditional
vehicle buyers will be a very, very big deal. Being affordable is key, not
having a large battery-pack. You'll get EV driving that's able to actually
compete.